Vertebral morphometry: A comparison of long-term precision of morphometricX-ray absorptiometry and morphometric radiography in normal and osteoporotic subjects
Ja. Rea et al., Vertebral morphometry: A comparison of long-term precision of morphometricX-ray absorptiometry and morphometric radiography in normal and osteoporotic subjects, OSTEOPOR IN, 12(2), 2001, pp. 158-166
Vertebral morphometry, the quantification of vertebral body shape, has prov
ed a useful tool in the identification and evaluation of osteoporotic verte
bral deformities in both epidemiologic surveys and clinical trials. Althoug
h conventionally it has been performed on lateral radiographs of the thorac
olumbar spine (morphometric radiography, MRX), it may now be accomplished o
n morphometric X-ray absorptiometry (MXA) scans, acquired on dual-energy X-
ray absorptiometry (DXA) machines. In this study the long-term precision of
vertebral height measurement using MXA and MRX was directly compared. Init
ially 24 postmenopausal women were recruited (mean age 67 +/- 5.8 years): 1
2 normal subjects (group 1) and 12 with osteoporosis and known vertebral de
formities (group 2). Each subject attended for a baseline visit at which th
ey had a MXA examination and lateral thoracic and lumbar radiographs. Twent
y-one subjects then returned 1.7 +/- 0.4 years later (10 subjects from grou
p 1 and 11 from group 2) for a follow-up visit to repeat both the MXA scans
and conventional radiographs. The baseline MXA scans and conventional radi
ographs were each analyzed quantitatively by two observers in a masked fash
ion, using a standard six-point method. The follow-up images were then anal
yzed by the same observers. The MRX observers were masked to the baseline a
nalyses, while the MXA observers utilized the manufacturer's 'compare' faci
lity. On all scans and radiographs anterior (Ha), mid (Hm) and posterior (H
p) vertebral heights were measured and wedge (Ha/Hp) and mid-wedge (Hm/Hp)
ratios calculated for each vertebral body, ideally from T4 to L4. MRX analy
zed 129 of the 130 available vertebrae in group 1 at both visits and 141 of
the 143 available in group 2, while MXA analyzed 124 vertebrae in group 1
at both visits and 127 in group 2. Intra- and inter-observer precision erro
rs, particularly in terms of coefficient of variation (CV%), were larger fo
r MXA than for MRX in both normal subjects and those with vertebral deformi
ties. For example, intra-observer precision errors for vertebral height mea
surement were 0.62 mm (2.9%) for MXA compared with 0.63 mm (2.2%) for MRX i
n group 1 (normal) subjects and 0.82 mm (4.2%) for MXA compared with 0.85 m
m (3.3%) for MRX for group 2 (osteoporosis and vertebral deformities) subje
cts. Both MXA and MRX inter-observer precision was clearly poorer than the
intra-observer precision, a problem associated with any morphometric techni
que. This was particularly noticeable for MXA; for example, precision of ve
rtebral height measurement in group 1 subjects was 0.62 mm (2.9%) for intra
-observer compared with 0.99 mm (4.6%) for inter-observer analyses. MXA and
MRX intra- and inter-observer precision was significantly poorer for subje
cts with vertebral deformities compared with those without, with the CV% fo
r subjects with vertebral deformity approximately 50% greater than that of
normal subjects. For example, MRX intra-observer precision for the midwedge
ratio was 2.6% for group 1 subjects compared with 3.8% for group 2 subject
s. The precision of vertebral height measurement on deformed vertebrae of g
roup 2 subjects was poorer than that for normal vertebrae in the same subje
cts using both MXA and MRX, as a result of increased variability in point p
lacement. For example, MXA intra-observer precision (RMS SD) for the wedge
ratio precision was 0.037 (3.9%) for normal vertebrae compared with 0.060 (
6.6%) for deformed vertebrae. We conclude that MXA precision was generally
poorer than MRX, although both techniques were adversely affected by the pr
esence of vertebral deformities and the use of more than one observer.
Although precision errors for both techniques were substantially smaller th
an the 20-25% reduction in vertebral height frequently proposed to identify
incident deformities, the poorer precision of MXA may lead to an increased
risk of erroneous classification of vertebrae as normal or deformed.